Home page of Satellite Internet and Information

Satellite Internet Forum.

Welcome, Guest.
Welcome to this satellite broadband discussion forum. Wherever you are and whatever your problem we are here to help each other. Connecting to the internet via satellite is not always easy but is critically important to those in remote places or with poor terrestrial infrastructure. Both service providers and customers are encouraged to contribute. Register at the bottom of the forum home page if you wish to contribute or ask question. Read the Forum rules.
      Satellite Internet Forum : Home Page          
Pages: 1

satellite internet : carriers in system design

(Read 3236 times)
Ex Member
Ex Member

Dec 10th, 2009 at 9:24pm  

I'm a student and I'm working on assignment whose purpose is to make a link budget of satellite system for internet.well I'd like to ask a couple of things, mostly for a more empirical opinion.
The first question is which is better between the two below situations:
- For the forward link to have 8 carriers of 4096Kbps rate or
- 4 carriers of 8192Kbps. In both situations FDMA is used for the carriers and TDM for each carrier .

An additional information is

The second is how much margin usually is considered for these systems?

I'm working on Ku band and the region where is to be implemented is in egypt.Thank you
Back to top
« Last Edit: Dec 11th, 2009 at 6:52pm by Admin1 »  
IP Logged
Ex Member
Ex Member

Reply #1 - Dec 10th, 2009 at 10:58pm  
Hi There,

First you have to decide the most excellent satellite covering the considered necessary location by means of the most EIRP, followed by performing a budgetary link budget which will depends on more than a few factors as:

•Other factors to be considered by the satellite operator himself
•Location of the transmitter
•Location of the receiver
•Type of modulation
•Type of the used modem
Back to top
IP Logged
Ex Member
Ex Member

Reply #2 - Dec 11th, 2009 at 1:09am  
thanks for you reply.I've considered all the factors you mentioned and I concluded that the system can support these two situations.that I want to know is which of these is performing better.
Back to top
IP Logged
Eric Johnston
Senior Member

Personal text from Profile,
Options, Top line

Posts: 2109
Reply #3 - Dec 11th, 2009 at 12:49pm  
A satellite transponder is always used most efficiently if you operate with one single large carrier, e.g. 27.5 Msps.

Operation with multiple carriers, such as 4 or 8, requires that the composite transponder output power be backed off by about 3 dB. Multiple carriers intermodulate with one another and cause inteference into each other unless the transponder is backed off into the linear part of its transfer characteristic. This means that, when operated multicarrier, that the power available from the transponder is about half, compared with single carrier operation.  Exceptions: In the case of 2 carriers, the 2A-B intermodulation products fall either side of the wanted carriers and the effect is loss of power only, with little interference. Some satellites have on-board linearisers that allow the satellite HPA to be operated nearer to saturation. If you have a vast surplus of bandwidth and little power then there are some special carrier frequency patterns, called Babcock spacings, whereby multiple carriers may be arranged so that the intermodulation products fall between the carriers.  This works best for analogue FM. Typically 85% of the bandwidth is wasted and unusable due to intermodulation interference.

Back off in multicarrier mode applies to your hub HPA/BUC amplifer as well.  A hub may have to tranmit multiple carriers, to feed traffic via different transponders for example, and in such cases must operate its HPA/BUC well backed off.

So 4 or 8 carriers is no good for the outlink.  You should combine them altogether into one large 32 Mbps carrier.  The traffic content may be divided up (different services, different customers, different traffic type priorities, QoS etc) using a Cisco router.

It is obviously cheaper to have one transmit modem at the hub rather than 4 or 8.  A lower power BUC/HPA at the hub will also cost less, as will the mains electrical power and cooling costs.

Best regards, Eric.
Back to top
« Last Edit: Dec 11th, 2009 at 6:51pm by Admin1 »  
IP Logged
Ex Member
Ex Member

Reply #4 - Dec 11th, 2009 at 7:18pm  
Thank you very much for the reply.
Back to top
IP Logged
Pages: 1